The mainstream view of the Egyptian pyramids

#1. A complete lack of any evidence for another culture to have built them while at the same time massive amounts of evidence that the AE were there
(part I)

The Pyramids were built in Egypt (that may sound silly but it's important) all existing evidence of prior cultures before, during and after the
pyramids were being built is - oddly enough, Egyptian until the arrival of the Hyksos and later Nubian invaders, no sign of any other culture*
around the time before the Egyptian culture evolved out of the earlier neolithic ones and those from the Paleolithic.

A quick review

Between 55,000 and 17,000 BP ago in the areas west of the Nile was sparsely inhabited, if at all, due to the region's aridity. During this period a
succession of paleo-lithic cultures existed on the banks of the Nile. As rains were steady in the early Holocene, the desert became grassland, and
people moved into the Sahara from all directions. Between 12,000 and 8,000 BP archaeological evidence suggests that the number of people living in the
Nile valley fell. At the same time, in the areas west of the river there was the suggestion of an increase in population and of societies that had
domesticated cattle who that large stone megaliths, developed some astronomical knowledge, made the earliest known pottery in Africa.

There are rock paintings of their environment, using at times themes that would also appear later in Egypt, along with other aspects of the culture.

After the climate again grew more arid after 8000 BP there is evidence for migration back into the Nile Valley and somewhat later the beginning of
agriculture

The first ‘Egyptian’ that has been found was a miner from Nazlet-Khater, dated 35,000 years ago

Fakhurian culture noted for use of small stool tools, The Fakhurian: a late paleolithic industry from Upper Egypt

Qadan culture a hunting and gathering culture that existed at various places in the Nile valley around 10,000 BP. They were noted for the extensive
use of wild grain. Some have theorized that they were the ones who later were to invent agriculture in the Nile valley. Phillipson, DW: African
Archaeology, page 149. Cambridge University Press, 2005

Merimde culture; The Merimde was a Neolithic group which corresponds in its later phase to the Faiyum A and the Badari cultures in Predynastic Egypt.
It is estimated that the culture existed 6800 and 6300 BP

[Quote] Maadi is the name of the Egyptian predynastic culture (and the type site) of Lower Egypt, the northern region (i.e., the lower Nile river
delta), from about 3900-3500 BC. The Maadi lived in small agricultural villages, with some copper imports, probably from the region of the Negev.
Burials were small with unremarkable grave goods

There is evidence for the existence of Libyan people who also most probably evolved from the earlier cultures mentioned above to the west of the Nile,
in Libya, and as raiders, traders and prisoners in AE

There is evidence for the existence of Nubian people to the south of the Nile, as raiders, traders and as an occupied people and later as
conquerors

There is evidence for the existence of many people to the northeast of the Nile, as raiders, as traders as an occupied people and later as
conquerors

There is evidence of trade with Mesopotamia and Asia Minor and with other parts of Africa, ‘Punt”

But there is at present no evidence of an ‘unknown’ 'advanced' culture anywhere in the Nile valley, Delta and particularly the areas where the
pyramids were built

#6. Built in an existing Egyptian necropolis - with no destruction of other graves. The pyramids are not single objects but are enclosed in a large
area, bounded by walls, and with a number of associate things inside that wall, all of which are Egyptian in nature

The most famous pyramids, the Giza ones are not single objects but are enclosed in a large area, once bounded by walls, and with a number of associate
things inside that wall, all of which are Egyptian in nature, these included mortuary temples and the tombs of high officials and family members

Next to Khufu's tomb are lesser tombs and a close up is show below of tombs associated with the his tomb

The burial sites that were to the east of the pyramid served the king's family, including his sons. Priests and other high officials were buried to
the west of the pyramid. Until the sixth dynasty, priests those who officiated at his mortuary temple, and managed the worship of the dead pharoah
were buried there

There are stories from the Nomadic Peoples, (or so I understood this, listening to commentary of those who partook in the creation/storyline of
the Stargate movie) that indicate the Great Pyramid was housing literature. Now this is in contradiction to the Expresses Views of Hawass, but I would
not throw the thought out, based on Hawass's views.

I would then ask for the source that records these stories? Scripts are rarely if ever considered evidence…..

This Priest is noting, according to Plato of course, their records???? Records that date back thousands of years, since the subject matter
dates to some 9000 BC.

If Plato was recording a real anecdote or just filling in the backstory for his dialogue

Makes you wonder if the Nomads had it right. If those records where housed in the Great Pyramid, we would still have them today.

If they were they would have been lost when the tomb was looted in antiquity

With that noted, There are no markings within the Great Pyramid. Sure some scammers had scratched Kufu in the Vaults over the King's Rooms,
but there is nothing else, aside from Markers denoting measurement.

I would suggest looking at the link I provided showing the many markings in the relieving chambers plus a claim by a non-qualified person (Sitchin)
without evidence doesn’t cause the evidence to disappear. Please look at it then compare those marking to marking found in the builders village

The writings attributed to Isaiah in the King James 1611 Bible, offer terms such as an " altar to the Lord ". Not a Tomb, but somewhere for
Egypt, to "do sacrifice and oblation" in the coming days and/or years.

As noted the tombs were associated with extensive mortuary temples

The Great Pyramid in specific, is a wonder in construction, that to this date has never been duplicated in exactness of it's layout. Some
dismiss it's alignment as being out some marginal figure, but that's based on one error on their part. The date of it's construction. It was built
long before the common belief suggests it was.

Evidence of this and how do you account for the evidence showing it was built in the time of the IV dynasty?

I would suggest the neighboring forgeries that go arm in arm with the Great Pyramid are what is being found within the quarries, along with the
residue of those builders. When you have sloppy workmanship, such as found in the two attempted copies, you can expect that the efforts in keeping a
clean work site with proper disposal of trash materials would also be lacking.

Khafre’s and Menkaures are nearly as complicated and Menkaures used much more granite than Khufu’s, they also used the same construction
techniques and were surrounded in the same way by mortuary temples.

well all i can tell you what i learned from the mainstream about their views on Egyptian pyramids is. Why did someone build something so big? how did
they do it? who were they? how could slaves make this!

questions questions and more questions

even though well all know the answer, the mainstream media still thinks "woooo look at the size of that ROCK!"

Why did Europeans build St Peters? Hmmm in my experience fringe tends to focus on the rocks as an excellent venue to try out personal incredulity

The Fourth Dynasty: Petrie quotes Manetho from an extract in 'Fragments' from 1832. He notes that while the 3rd kingdom is said to be composed of
Memphite kings, and the 5th dynasty of Elephantine rulers, the 4th dynasty was supposed to have been composed of 'eight Memphite Kings of a different
race'. The list is as follows:

It would appear that Manetho confused the later Hyksos invasion with the time of the IV dynasty. The Hyksos invasion can be seen in the historical and
archaeological record. Now could the IV dynasty have been foreigners? Perhaps but that seems to have not been noted by the Egyptians themselves,
except by Manetho thousands of years after the event

First, a Date of 4850 +/- BC for the construction of the Great Pyramid, which is of course, contrary to the Mainstream by 2000 + years.

Second, it wasn't Egyptians that built it.

Actually Egyptian would still have made it if Manetho was right and the IV dynasty were foreign rulers, however archaeology shows there was no
Egyptian civilization at that time, they were still neolithic hunter/gather farmers

that is a funny list, not exactly substantial, but clearly an assault on the fringe writers making claims to the edge.

1. The builders, it is not that important, but I would go with Egyptian, who else makes sense?
2. The writing inside the pyramids is insignificant to the sites where actual bodies were found. Haven't you been to the Valley of the Kings with all
those fancy pictures on virtually any convenient surface. Nice entertainment for the dead. The pyramids only an intrusion burial has any significant
writing inside the tombs, unless you count the graffiti.

The culture changed over time, Lehner has a theory that there was art in the pyramids but put up on wooden panels

3. Ancient writers came long after the event, they took the view of the guys who had dumped bodies around the pyramids hence the tomb view for
eons. Nick Cage has built a pyramid for a tomb, does that mean we should all believe pyramids were tombs?

The pyramids were built in existing cemeteries, we have found there brothers, mothers and sisters- so where did they bury the Pharaohs?

6. I disagree with this, the necropolis sprung up around the site as the pyramids themselves ceased to function due to drops in the water
table. Clearly it would be silly to put corpses into the ground with all that water described by Dunn, Cadman, Kunkel, Knight/Butler and myself. If
you had been to Saqqara you would have seen all the dried up wells there as well. They also tried to dig into the ground untl they hit the water
table, just shows the efforts they would go to. The hole is very long and not a corpse in it.

As noted before the necropolis were there before the pyramids

7. Of the 100+ pyramids how many actually had a corpse in them ???? It is disingenuous to imply that the majority did when it is a tiny percentage.
These were accessible sites or worse mastabas on which pyramids were conveniently built.

8. A big granite box does not prove a structure was a tomb. Neither does a few corpses laying about the place, surely the mainstream has a
better case than this.

Actually it is excellent evidence for just that, especially when added to all the other evidence, look at Menkaures sacraphagus

9 & 10 & 13 Ah here is the main body of the mainstream 'proof' people said they were tombs, the afterlife was important, death is to be
venerated etc.. A whole pile of superstitious nonsense that came after the structures had ceased to work. Led to the construction of the spirit/ death
religions on which the modern ones are base. No wonder its appealing people are fascinated with death.

In your present day opinion, I'll go with the opinions of the people who built the tombs

11. If only C dating was that accurate.

It is if used properly

12. Proves nothing either way, there would be people necessary to carry out the functioning structure, the refurbs, the subsequent Idiot lord
Internments etc.. There were people working there period.

What were the titles of these people as recorded in their tombs?

I couldn't agree more with your comments on the fringe authors who write exclusively about the Giza pyramids. These are unusual and more
complicated than the whole scheme of development that preceded them. It is hard to understand a jet engine or kray computer if you have not looked at
the basics first. I am neither mainstream nor fringe, but start from the simplest incarnations of this technology and build to the working mechanic of
Cheops or those cute ones next to it. They all work under the same principles.

You appear to be an alternative, when you have enough posts I look forward to your thread on your idea. I sent you a PM suggesting you take your idea
to the Hall of Ma'at - where there are real Egyptologists, none here to my knowledge

The fringe writers who confuse people with the detail of Cheops are doing as big a disservice to archaeology as the mainstream writers who turn them
into tombs.

Thanks Scott but a link to your listing of mainstream evidence would be more appropriate to the purpose of this thread

SC: What you fail to realise or understand is that the evidence is neutral (ALL evidence) and should be treated as such. It is the interpretation we
place upon the evidence that presents the problems and contradictions. You have presented facts from the culture as have I. The facts I present
contradict the mainstream interpretation of the evidence. I am sure, however, that mainstream Egyptology would much rather gloss over or completely
ignore those facts that do not fit at all well with its interpretation of the data and concentrate only on what they perceive does support its Pyramid
Tomb Theory (PTT).

Yes, the PTT may, on the surface, appear to be correct but appearances can be so deceptive. As I point out there is much evidence that contradicts the
PTT that is being ignored. There is, however, another theory that explains ALL the evidence, including those elements that contradict the PTT. I am
sure, however, you would much prefer that such heresy go unspoken. If, however,you believe that ALL evidence that pertains to a theory should be
explained rather than dismissed then I suggest that you seriously consider ALL the evidence and not just those pieces that orthodoxy decides are
relevant - that's called 'stacking the cards' or 'cooking the books' and deceives no one but yourself. It is akin to the cardinals of the Inquisition
who refused to look through Galileo's telescope to see the proof of his argument. Why? Because they controlled knowledge and knowledge is power. They
did not wish to be confronted with 'alternative evidence' that could threaten to diminish their power. Best just ignore it and hope it goes away
thereby preserving the status quo.

It didn't go away and in the end, the church lost the argument - and, ultimately, much of its power.

I can't say I completely agree with many of the ideas that you have proposed in your threads, but I do like your answer here, and I think that you
have a very valid point. Only too often do we see the mainstream, such as represented here in Hanslune's thread, completely refuse to acknowledge or
discuss information that either contradicts it's position, or that simply they do not have an explanation for. Of course, as you point out, there
should be no shame in simply admitting that they don't know, but instead, rather than do that, they find it necessary to curtail all discussion, or
worse, ridicule those who may feel they have a solution.

Discussion, I have been told, discovers, and it is perhaps that, that they are fearful of in this day and age.

Well, hello. Nice to meet up with you again in the warped world of ATS.

And I mean that with due respect since I feel thought alone, is the product being peddled here. The ability for many to discuss, debate, discover, and
divulge in a collective and civil manner, so that others may, if they opt to, utilize the information being presented on the many various topics found
in this site.

I am in agreement with you my friend. But I do also find some of which you are expressing as an indicator that this process IS WORKING. We can't all
agree.

If your views about a subject, are something you are comfortable with, and you have a come to accept these as the Truth, by your understanding,
NOTHING I ever present will change your view on the Subject.

I have preconceived concepts of a reality, that Hanslune doesn't. He has his own. That's the wonder called ATS to me.

And to my Friend, Hanslune

I have noted on a few occasions lately, you are a good researcher. The information you amass and present is full of detail.

Your OWN materials clearly indicate several things about this specific subject, and any conflict you have addressed is directly from the supportive
materials you have offered. This is the thing I don't understand here though.

You premise the need to affirm, in some manner, the Mainstream View, which I expect you feel you have done. I will agree in some cases, the evidence
does seemingly support the premise, but again, I qualify that by reaffirming, IN SOME CASES, and SEEMINGLY.

That is far from Carte Blanche for all the Pyramids.

Now, from the Materials you have offered, we can be left to presume the following.

NONE of the Fourth Dynasty where Egyptians at all, and the Greatest Monument on this planet, was not constructed by Egyptians. Your own materials
confirm, this.

NO ONE HAS ANY IDEA WHEN THE GREAT PYRAMID WAS CONSTRUCTED. You present details which indicate to separate times, 4800 BC and 2500 BC (approximately).

And the Chronologies have a strange indicator that the Builder, WROTE the Sacred Book, and took it with him when they moved to the Judean Hills, and
built Jerusalem.

This is your material being offered. I didn't present any of this material.

I wish I could feel even remotely comfortable here in ATS to even brooch the preconceived notions I have about the Great Pyramid, but I have attempted
that a few times many years ago, and I learned the lesson which Biliverdin spoke of previously.

The funniest thing about that, is how frightened people are to consider the fact there maybe other viable answers. I think that there is a good reason
for that though. THEY FEAR THEY HAVE EMBRACED A RUSE, SCAM, LIE and believed it to be TRUTH.

You see, when it comes to a lot of the "other Pyramids", you can say whatever you wish. They have no meaning outside of selfish gratification of a
ruler during a period that wished to have himself remembered as long as possible. Whether he was buried in it, or not, doesn't even matter to me.
It's the vice of vanity, that these other structures are built upon, and I leave that at that.

My contribution to your effort here was one Oracle, found within the King James 1611 Bible, and despite the details you have offered, you have not
done much but present materials that attest to the words described within that Oracle. Materials I never even imagined existed. In light of that,
I'll think it would be worthy to note part of that Oracle to Egypt.

Isaiah 19:19 In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at the border thereof to the Lord.
20 And it shall be for a sign and for a witness unto the Lord of hosts in the land of Egypt: for they shall cry unto the Lord because of the
oppressors, and he shall send them a saviour, and a great one, and he shall deliver them.
21 And the Lord shall be known to Egypt, and the Egyptians shall know the Lord in that day, and shall do sacrifice and oblation; yea, they shall vow a
vow unto the Lord, and perform it.
22 And the Lord shall smite Egypt: he shall smite and heal it: and they shall return even to the Lord, and he shall be intreated of them, and shall
heal them.
23 In that day shall there be a highway out of Egypt to Assyria, and the Assyrian shall come into Egypt, and the Egyptian into Assyria, and the
Egyptians shall serve with the Assyrians.
24 In that day shall Israel be the third with Egypt and with Assyria, even a blessing in the midst of the land:
25 Whom the Lord of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel mine inheritance.

If one feels the need, I would review the Whole Chapter. An Oracle to Egypt, seems to read
like today's News. Just Scroll to Chapter 19

Thanks Scott but a link to your listing of mainstream evidence would be more appropriate to the purpose of this thread

There is, however, another theory that explains ALL the evidence, including those elements that contradict the PTT. I am sure, however, you would much
prefer that such heresy go unspoken. If, however,you believe that ALL evidence that pertains to a theory should be explained rather than dismissed
then I suggest that you seriously consider ALL the evidence and not just those pieces that orthodoxy decides are relevant - that's called 'stacking
the cards' or 'cooking the books' and deceives no one but yourself.

That is very eloquent Mr Scott Creighton.

But I think if we seriously look at the whole picture, we may find that deception is the problem. A deception upon Egypt, by those who abide by their
Masters.

To me, Hawass, and the Cult of Snakes he is/was the Forked Tongued Mouth Piece for, intended to have these varing views and discourse to deflect the
truth of WHO Egypt is, and it's true glorious past.

As you may perceive, I have a completely alternative view on Egypt, and who these people are, but again, bringing these thoughts out for
consideration, will only arouse the intolerant zealots from their current state of slumber. It would be like Poking a Bear with a stick, when it's
napping. It would dissolve Hanslune's efforts into chaos, which is where they tend to wallow.

Anyways, thanks for your insights and considered input. Despite the response, IT IS WELCOMED since discussion is the goal, and we can only learn, when
presented with the Facts, ALL the Facts.

how with out a satalite could the ancient Egyptian know the orbital period of the earth?
how without a telescope did they work out out the proportion difference between the earth and the moon?
how without using pie could the SQUARE the CIRCLE demotions be worked out, of the base?

without clocks how did the ancient Egyptians know of a meter?
we define a kilo meter by defining the earths meridian circumference,

we measure acceleration in meters per second per second,
but meters and seconds are defined by rotation and circumference,

1983, the metre was redefined in the International System of Units (SI) as the distance travelled by light in vacuum in 1⁄299,792,458 of a
second. As a result, the numerical value of c in metres per second is now fixed exactly by the definition of the metre.[5]

I'm not sure where you've got these ideas from and I even watched some of the video...a lot of cherry-picking in there.

Any culture will devise a system of numbers to keep a count of time. As they develop agriculture and trade, they will apply the numbers to concepts of
quantity and eventually weights. It's one of the first acts for any City State to standardise weights and measures. Likewise a system of measurement
for length (architecture, planning etc) is a requirement too.

Every early civilisation had to go through this process. Timekeeping follows inevitable patterns as the two most reliable objects they had were the
moon and the sun...these observations link in to the solstices too. Egyptians did their best, but weren't very accurate
(link). Early records suggest
they followed a 320 day year. That would take a *year* to start going wrong. They then followed a lunar year of 360 days before tacking on 5 days.
(basic link)
The Chinese took a similar, inevitable course and opted to follow
lunar and solar years and their measures differed too.

Now I'm not at all sure where you came to the idea that they'd need to know metres or how you've applied that to form the notion that they had to
know the speed of light? They didn't measure in metres and they were far more
interested in the height of the Nile waters than the speed of light. They had a barter economy with standardised measurements to support trade, taxes
and building.

Boring eh? It's not as exciting as the idea that ancient man was given the ability to count by aliens or ancient astronauts.

There are facts and evidences which prooves that pyramids where built by another ancient civilization.

Speaking about number 1 of your list I will say that you have to see about what Solon the Athinian, one of the seven wise-man in ancient Greece, said
about his journey in Egypt. He met a variety of people, spoke to many of them and gathered informaion about subjects he was interested about.

In one of his speeches in Athens he talked about a met he had with one priest of the highest rank. He was saying that Solon's people (Greeks) should
be very proud of their history and their supreme structures. Solon did not understand what the priest was talking about so he asked the priest to be
more specific cause this knowledge was forgotten in Greece. The priest then talked about the years of the war between the Greeks and the Atlantis ( it
happened around 9600 BC as theories say which theories confirm the words of the egyptian priest), the reasons about the beginning of this war and how
grateful everybody should be to Greeks for winning and destroying Atlantis(before this war happened Greeks were the rulers of Europe, Africa, Asia and
Atlantis was the rulers of Atlantis-of course- and America). Then he spoke about the pyramids and said that they were built by the Greeks at the ages
of the Greece-Atlantis war. Solon stood voiceless as the words of the priest were out of imagination for him. The technology of those ages was similar
to the technology of gods, said the priest. After that the discussion of the two men moved forward but i can't recall what i read about that. A title
which i read about the construction of pyramids and the battle that happened there was "The Giza Death Star".

I can't remember where these information came from, although i remember the title of the non-english book in which i found them. You can say i am a
troll or a whimsical but this would 100% wrong. However, they are facts and evidences that egyptians did not built them nor they were built in order
to be pharaoh's tomb!

I'm not sure where you've got these ideas from and I even watched some of the video...a lot of cherry-picking in there.

sorry posted the wrong vide3o

, i have corrected my mistake

Any culture will devise a system of numbers to keep a count of time. As they develop agriculture and trade, they will apply the numbers to
concepts of quantity and eventually weights. It's one of the first acts for any City State to standardise weights and measures. Likewise a system of
measurement for length (architecture, planning etc) is a requirement too.

i do understand the idea of the natural progression of mathematics,
and the logical reasons to use it.

Every early civilisation had to go through this process. Timekeeping follows inevitable patterns as the two most reliable objects they had were
the moon and the sun...these observations link in to the solstices too. Egyptians did their best, but weren't very accurate
(link). Early records suggest
they followed a 320 day year. That would take a *year* to start going wrong. They then followed a lunar year of 360 days before tacking on 5 days.
(basic link)
The Chinese took a similar, inevitable course and opted to follow
lunar and solar years and their measures differed too.

please explain how to define a second without a meter?

Now I'm not at all sure where you came to the idea that they'd need to know metres or how you've applied that to form the notion that they had
to know the speed of light?

time (elapsed) space (travelled) distance (rotation) and circumference are required in proportional ratios (to each other) to compute a second, i
struggle to understand how to factor the equation that is required to proportion these elements into a cohesive ratio. how did the Egyptians do it?

They didn't measure in metres and they were far more interested in the height
of the Nile waters than the speed of light. They had a barter economy with standardised measurements to support trade, taxes and building.

in my understanding the ancient Egyptians had more interest in harmonic proportions and wave form over time equations than water levels.
to have an understanding of harmonic intervals to the degree shown in the construction of the great pyramid is to me baffling. while the nile did
equal food for the kingdom, that food was expended in the construction of monuments.

Boring eh? It's not as exciting as the idea that ancient man was given the ability to count by aliens or ancient astronauts.

i contend that the mathematics of sound and proportional relationships between various materials (atomic) and size/shape were very well understood.

i have looked into the "mortuary temples" and concluded that they were harmonic in nature, and preformed functions similar to an electronic circuit
board, with sound diodes and sound pre-amplifier and resonators.

we simply dont understand the mathematics to decode it properly due to its ruinous state,
IMHO

You've lost me. A second is measured as a fraction of a minute. Or are you talking about rhyme and meter?

Is there any evidence that they had the concept of seconds? It isn't clear that they measured minutes and merkhats and dials were very poor keepers
of the hours.

Your understanding of an Egyptian fascination with harmonic proportions or wave form isn't a popular one although some of the acoustics at neolithic
sites are interesting. They were certainly fascinated with the tides of the Nile.

The rest of your ideas would be hard to substantiate and don't reflect the history we have of the AE. Whereas your thinking involves some advanced
technical knowledge, neither their culture nor their writings support the idea. This is how the mainstream view has generated itself. They were
absorbed by life, death and how the Nile represented them. Such a focus is demonstrated in what they left behind and what was described by neighbours
and enemies.

Maybe you could write a thread on your thinking about harmonics and the ideas in that video? They aren't very clear here. Secret or lost knowledge
appears to be a part of it, but I'd disagree with that perspective. There was good account of AE maths as defined in the Rhind
Papyrus...listen here. A lot of authors and one or two members like to present a notion of 'to
the Nth decimal point' and yet their own mathematical writings show how far removed they were from that level of math. It's a good listen if you
have the time.

I don't buy the mainstream views on how they were built and I don't credit aliens either.

I do believe the Egyptians built them but they were built with an "advanced" technology we are kept from knowing. I think this is how many
megalithic structures were built. I use to question my teachers in school about the way they said they were built. Even then I didn't believe it. I
think the Egyptians were more advanced than we are told and had technology that helped them build such massive structures. This isn't just for their
pyramids but the huge statues that are all over Egypt.

I watched the program "The Pyramid Code" and was in awe at what it had in it, same can be said for "Revelation of The Pyramids."

To me they want us to believe that no other civilization was advanced before us and well I just don't believe that. All you have to do is look at the
structures they built to see they were advanced esp if we can't build such structures today.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.